Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
The Almighty Buck Open Source

Crowdfunding Platform For Drupal Development Launches 38

angry tapir writes "A team of developers has launched a new crowdfunding platform — — that's designed to help accelerate development work on the open-source Drupal CMS, as well as potentially fund new training material and other projects of interest to community members. I had a long-ish chat to one of the co-founders about the goals of the platform and how crowdfunding can be used to push forward open source development."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Crowdfunding Platform For Drupal Development Launches

Comments Filter:
  • by Tablizer ( 95088 ) on Monday September 23, 2013 @03:09AM (#44921921) Journal

    What, are their sales druping off?

  • by Anonymous Coward

    fail. dreams of bringing in $1 million + per month [] is just that, a delusional dream.

    • by dingen ( 958134 )

      There are over 970 000 registered users on If only 0.5% of them would donate $22.2 (0.5% of the average monthly salary of US programmer) each month, we would raise $1.3M every year which equals 24.3 full time developers.

      But if 1% of us would donate 1% of our salary each month, we would rise $5.1M - enough to feed 96.2 full time developers. And if we add the money that companies, from small to enterprise level donate for Drupal development each year, these numbers could be even higher.

      Wow. That is delusional like you don't often see. Why would 1% of the registered users donate 1% of their salary all of a sudden? They should be happy if they raise 1% of that.

      • by cstec ( 521534 )

        ...But if 1% of us would donate 1% of our salary each month, we would rise $5.1M - enough to feed 96.2 full time developers...

        Wow. That is delusional like you don't often see.

        True, they aren't typically this cheap. Usually they want 10% of your salary to promise that everything will be swell after you die, as long as you followed their orders. This one's on sale.

        • by Cryacin ( 657549 )
          You know, they could just request for 0.5% of the income of the companies that used their system. That would certainly equate to more than 1.3M every year, and would mean more than 96.2 full time developers. (I'm not cutting 80% off that last developer for the team).

          Oh wait. That would make them a commercial company, like Adobe, or Oracle. Sorry guys. No salary for you.
      • Re:destined to (Score:4, Insightful)

        by pjt33 ( 739471 ) on Monday September 23, 2013 @05:36AM (#44922295)

        To add to the delusion, check those figures. 970000 * 0.5% * 0.5% = 24.25, so their figures check out only if employing someone costs no more than their salary. Reality check: it costs between 50% and 100% more. They also assume that two dozen developers won't need any management. And frankly they would be better off employing 6 technical writers to document the system.

  • I work for a hosting company, Drupal is the biggest piece of crap I've ever seen, along with all the other CMS/"frameworks".

    These people hire some cheap agency (usually outsourced), they throw something together with Drupal, then the customer screams and yells when it completely fails at actual high traffic loads.

    • Apparently it's good enough for the White House (and various other high traffic sites). Drupal is capable of handling high traffic, if you take care setting it up right.
      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Drupal is capable of handling high traffic, if you spend a large amount of money on hardware, especially MySQL servers, and cache the hell out of everything.

        FTFY. I say that as someone who's dealt with Drupal performance issues for nearly a decade.

        • That was our experience as well (on the one Drupal project I've been involved in). Especially the database load was a lot higher than we anticipated.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by cute-boy ( 62961 )

        First, they are serving content from a varnish cache. That is how they cope with the load. Which is fine for anonymous users, but it's not really Drupal handling the load.

        Drupal sucks badly for personalised content. Just look at the simple advice myphpadmin gives to see how badly it's tables are indexed by default, or it's own 'devel' module to see just how long some of those queries to it's own caching system (mysql backed) take.

        Keep throwing hardware at it and it comes good (at a price). So do most things

      • Normally I hate throwing rocks at any particular technology, but Drupal has some issues.

        Using module A will often require modules B-ZZ and the maintainer of A has nothing to do with B-ZZ. If one module falls behind, often everything begins to fall behind with it. If you are just using it for a blog or small news site, Drupal is awesome, but moving beyond that becomes problematic.

        Perhaps if Drupal Core began bringing more common stuff into the fold I'd have a different opinion, but as is the ecosystem feels

        • by Tablizer ( 95088 )

          Perhaps if Drupal Core began bringing more common stuff into the fold I'd have a different opinion, but as is the ecosystem feels hacked together and weak. I don't enjoy saying that.

          Isn't that kind of a design trade-off? To tune stuff well its best to be integrated to avoid reinventing content access wheels and having version dependency combo problems. However, integration complicates and bloats the core: feature-itus. If you make many features be relatively independent add-ons, then you simplify the core,

    • Allow me me to rephrase, "using a cheap outsourced agency to build a Drupal/CMS/framework based site usually leads to customers screaming and the site failing under high traffic loads".

    • Re:Drupal sucks. (Score:4, Informative)

      by Zedrick ( 764028 ) on Monday September 23, 2013 @04:54AM (#44922175)
      I also work for a hosting company, and Drupal is not a problem (unlike Joomla, for example). Not even for slashdotted sites. Oh, we also use drupal for our own (very high traffic) main site.
      • by hetta ( 414084 )

        I'd love to know of a drupal-capable hosting company ... mine, currently, isn't quite up to scratch.

    • Yeah when I worked for an agency we had a few "drupal" and "joomla" sites that where very poor it got to the point that some of my team refused to work on them (basic updating using the back office tool not coding). They where afraid something woudl break after they did a trivial content edit and they woudl get blamed.
    • 1. Do you offer a specific Drupal distribution that you manage, or do you just give the customer a LAMP stack and let them set up Drupal any way they want?
      2. How much do you charge?

      Drupal can be set up to be extremely scalable, but someone has to do that setup.

      If you offer a Drupal distribution and it doesn't scale, that is your fault. If making it stable and scalable is "too much work", charge more.

      On the other hand, if your customers are setting up Drupal by themselves, then it isn't your problem if

  • by carrier lost ( 222597 ) on Monday September 23, 2013 @12:08PM (#44924717) Homepage

    I made a logo [], if anyone wants to use it.

    I love Drupal. I've been using Drupal 6 since 2008, running Botaday on it since February of 2012.

Each new user of a new system uncovers a new class of bugs. -- Kernighan